Find Similar Notes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, indicating safe and deterministic behavior. The description adds valuable context: uses existing chunk embeddings (no live API call), making it fast and free. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence delivers the core functionality, second sentence adds key insight about performance and prerequisites. Front-loaded and efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, so description should hint at return format or behavior. It does not describe what the returned data looks like (e.g., list of paths or objects). Also doesn't mention error cases (e.g., missing source note). The prerequisite is stated, which is good, but completeness could be improved.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema provides full descriptions (100% coverage). The description restates the general purpose of path and limit without adding new nuances. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the verb 'return' and the resource 'most semantically similar notes from the index', including the exclusion of the source note. Distinguishes itself by describing underlying mechanism (existing embeddings) and speed/cost benefits, which helps differentiate from siblings like search_semantic.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use (find similar notes) and a key prerequisite ('Run index_vault first'). Implies when not to use (embeddings not populated) but does not name alternative tools explicitly. Provides clear context for usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.